And who made you the morality police?
Since when is everyone's sexual preference news, or something to "vote" on? If this "union" is considered, it opens up a lot of other questions - why can't my sister and I be "married" and put her on my health insurance? How about my dad and I making a "union" and then he can also be put on my healthcare, and get other "spousal" benefits? It all comes down to attention and money....things everyone wants.
Will it? no. Should it? Yes
I don't know if it will happen in five years but I doubt if it will be long after. It wil happen because the younger generation has been brainwashed. This younger generation was brought up being taught that predujices are wrong.
So being taught this they grew up believing that ones religion, race or nationally isn't better than any other and that all people deserve the same respect. This younger generation has taken it to the extreme and even believe it is a persons right to love and share their life with whomever they like because they believe its wrong for anyone to impose their views on anyone else.
Just like a person has no control over their race or ethnic background, people have no control on how they are wired sexually. A person can't be coerced, tricked or recruited into being gay and gay people can't be cured. People are wired the way they are wired.
So when everyone in America is aloud to marry who they love because this younger generation doesn't know any better you can blame it on their parents for not teaching them to be the bigots most of their grandparents were.
....and some people are wired to be haters. Nothing can be done about them either.
So the media wants you to keep cheering about sames sex marriage bill is all about "love"...look closely at the real reason this was brought to the Supreme Court.
This begins with the case of Edie Winsdor who married her partner of more than 40 years in Canada in 2007. Their relationship was recognized by the state of New York, where they lived together. When her spouse died two years later, she inherited a huge estate tax bill which she would have avoided if her marriage had been recognized under federal law.
The Supreme Court will weigh the tax ramifications of the law and decide.
At last count, there were 1,138 provisions in federal laws that listed marital status as a factor in determining benefits, rights and privileges. The list, prepared by the Government Accountability Office, was most recently updated in 2003.
The most prevalent are tax laws. Despite their marriage certificates, gay and lesbian spouses cannot get tax-free health benefits from their employers. That alone costs them about $1,000 a year on average, says Gary Gates, a demographer who studies gay and lesbian trends at the UCLA School of Law's Williams Institute.
Gays and lesbians can't file joint federal tax returns, as heterosexual married couples can, which often saves families thousands of dollars. If gays or lesbians divorce, any alimony is considered a gift subject to taxation, while for opposite-sex couples, it's tax-free. And when a spouse dies, the widow or widower is liable for inheritance taxes; heterosexual couples enjoy a marital deduction.
Also, in case you're not aware, U.S. adults, on average, think homosexuals make up about 25 percent of the entire population. Actually: Bisexuals make up 1.8% of the population, while 1.7% are gay or lesbian. Transgender adults make up 0.3% of the population. for a total of between 2 percent and 4 percent of the population.
And don't forget the marriage penalty.
Oftentimes, when two homosexual women get "married", the photo will show one woman in a typical white wedding dress while the other will be dressed in a tux. Adorable! So, we pretty much know who straps it on and who is submissive. Now, if two homosexual men get "married" and one were to wear a typical wedding dress, we would look at that "man" as an absolute freak or, at the very least, a transvestite. Would you ever let one of your young children anywhere near the man that wears the dress? Probably not but would it be objectionable to let your child near the women in man's clothes? I would think such blatant prejudice should be an outrage to the progressive crowd and the LGBT community should work on having this as acceptable behavior.
Boy, for a political party that has a platform of "less gov't" and "keep the gov't out of our private lives" the GOP/TEA sure puts a lot of energy into passing laws that interfere with people's private lives. But then again, the GOP/TEA is only interested in passing laws that interfere with "other" people's private lives. Yeah, no matter how many times you call yourselves "patiots", you guys are pretty much worthless human garbage.
Forgotten your password?